"Fox News Sunday" is heading to Louisville, Ky. Jack Conway, Kentucky's attorney general and the Democratic candidate for Senate , and Rand Paul, the Republican nominee and son of Representative Ron Paul, Republican of Texas, have agreed to a live debate on "Fox News Sunday" on Oct.3 at 9 a.m. (Eastern time).
Join the discussion below, or Read more at thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com.
#51554 Oct 5, 2012
What happened Mr.Obama??
Obama, Nov. 3, 2007: When I am president, I will end the tax giveaways to companies that ship our jobs overseas, and I will put the money in the pockets of working Americans, and seniors, and homeowners who deserve a break.
Clinton, Nov. 19, 2007: And we are going to finally close the tax loopholes and stop giving tax breaks to companies that ship jobs overseas. Enough with outsourcing American jobs using taxpayer dollars.
Both candidates are referring to a feature of the U.S. tax code that allows domestic companies to defer taxes on “unrepatriated income.” In other words, revenue that companies earn through their overseas subsidiaries goes untaxed by the IRS as long as it stays off the company’s U.S. books.
But economists, including left-leaning ones, do not agree that eliminating this provision will bring an end to off-shoring. And here’s why: In the U.S., companies are taxed 35 percent on earnings of $10 million to $15 million or on all earnings over $18.3 million. That’s one of the highest corporate tax rates in the world, making an overseas move somewhat attractive to companies that wish to avoid the U.S. tax rate. But that’s not the leading reason companies send jobs overseas. According to a 2005 report by the Government Accountability Office, global technological advancement, increased openness of countries such as China and India, the higher education level of foreign workers in technological fields, and the reduced cost per foreign worker are all contributing factors to off-shoring.
Both leading Democratic candidates have referred to tax breaks to oil companies:
Clinton, July 23, 2007: First of all, I have proposed a strategic energy fund that I would fund by taking away the tax break for the oil companies, which have gotten much greater under Bush and Cheney.
Obama, June 22, 2007: In the face of furious lobbying, Congress brushed aside incentives for the production of more renewable fuels in favor of more tax breaks for the oil and gas companies.
Both candidates are referring to H.R. 6, the 2005 energy bill that contained $14.3 billion in subsidies for energy companies. However, as we’ve reported numerous times, a vast majority of those subsidies (all but $2.8 billion) were for nuclear power, energy-efficient cars and buildings, and renewable fuels research. In addition, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service, the tax changes in the 2005 energy bill produced a net tax increase for the oil and gas companies, as we’ve reported time and time and time again. They did get some breaks, but they had more taken away.
#51555 Oct 5, 2012
You should really change your name to the spin doctor because you do some spinning! lol What surplus are you talking about? Clinton's pretend surplus? LMMFAO! "IF" Clinton had left a surplus our national debt would have decreased. Do you have a clue as to how many years ago it was that our national debt decreased? 53 years ago. I'm pretty sure Clinton wasn't president 53 years ago so no, Clinton didn't leave a surplus. Clinton was the dog that borrowed heavily from Social Security and the Defense Fund to trick the moron masses into believing he was God and left a surplus. Borrowed means at some point you would have to pay it back. Clinton left office without ever even attempting to pay anything back. He threw more granny's under the bus than Obama ever has...well, if Obama gets re-elected he still has a shot at being as corrupt and as big a liar as Clinton was.
Spin on this, loser.
#51556 Oct 5, 2012
These are the ACTUAL FACTS which you CANNOT seem to understand.
When President George W. Bush took office, our national debt was $5.768 trillion. During his presidency, the national debt rose by an average of $607 billion a year. How does that compare to Obama? During Obama's presidency to date, the national debt has risen by an average of $1.723 trillion a year — or by a jaw-dropping $1.116 trillion more, per year, than it rose even under Bush.
And none of this even takes into account Obamacare, which the Congressional Budget Office says would increase spending by more than $2 trillion in its real first decade (2014 to 2023)— and which, even under very rosy projections, the CBO says would increase the national debt by $341 billion by the end of 2019.
#51557 Oct 5, 2012
lol It makes you wonder if these morons are pretending because it is hard to believe that anyone can really be that stupid. Maybe repubtards is the exception. I believe he really is as ignorant as he portrays himself to be. But that could be a good thing in a way. Repubtard posts all kinds of crazy stuff, y'all put him in his place with the facts and he slithers away for awhile until he can make something else up at which time you put him in his place yet again. People notice these things and it makes them check out the facts and then they refuse to vote for Obama again. So repubtard's ignorance does some good on the forum. I thank him for that! lol
#51558 Oct 5, 2012
Just a bump in the road.
#51559 Oct 5, 2012
I served honorably I doubt any tea party douchnozzle like you did
#51560 Oct 5, 2012
People under 55 beware!!!
#51561 Oct 5, 2012
Left wing liberals have no right to say anything about dead soldiers, since they are the ones that weakened our security and cut funding to the military. Why? Because they are heartless self serving immature selfish anti-American gutless cowards Hollywood liberals that only care about what someone else can give them or what they can take away from others.
#51562 Oct 5, 2012
Democrats ran the Viet Nam conflict, more that 58,000 dead Americans. Democrats ran security during the 1990s, we got attacked 9 times, including 9/11. Now some troops are running out of bullets in Afgh because democrats are running that. Called to serve, but without support. Gutless democrats and liberals.
#51563 Oct 5, 2012
LMMFAO! And I am Patton. We can be anybody we want to be on the internet. I am rich today and I am vacationing in Tahiti and writing my tell-all book and Obama rocks and the dems care so much about the middle class they have sent nose diving to the poverty level in the last 4 years and it's raining pure gold here today. How is it in your pretend internet world demotard? You are so stupid you are actually funny.
#51564 Oct 5, 2012
it was nearly 11 trillion when dubya left just say it!!!! what about the other spending? you don't dispute that? just because it isn't on the books don't mean it wasn't spent and what about the trillion that was "to be spent " no matter what if nothing what so ever was done the deficit would be 1 trillion period. and the trillion OUT of social security? what what what????????? no can defend grasshopper no can snatch pebble from hand
#51565 Oct 5, 2012
I'd rather be a repubtard than a democrap!
#51566 Oct 5, 2012
You sound like a draft dodger to me......
#51568 Oct 5, 2012
But you want to raise hell about Bush who DID serve in the military when Obama and Biden did not???
Why do you have a hard on about Bush???? He is gone! Get over it!!!!
#51569 Oct 5, 2012
Fact Check: Obama says Romney opposed ending tax break – only he didn’t
Published October 05, 2012
A day after the Obama campaign countered Mitt Romney's strong debate performance by accusing him of playing fast and loose with the facts, President Obama threw out a doozy of his own.
At a rally Friday in Fairfax, Va., Obama claimed Romney had outright rejected his proposal to end tax breaks for oil and gas companies.
"He said there's no way that he'd close the loophole that gives big oil companies billions each year in corporate warfare," Obama said, in the middle of a litany of complaints on Romney's tax positions from Wednesday's debate.
Just one problem. Romney didn't say that.
Rather, the Republican nominee said that if tax rates are lowered as his plan calls for, the $2.8 billion in breaks for oil companies should be on the table.
Here's what Romney said:
"But, you know, if we get that tax rate from 35 percent down to 25 percent, why that $2.8 billion is on the table. Of course it's on the table. That's probably not going to survive (if) you get that rate down to 25 percent."
The president, though, has been trying to recover from Wednesday's debate by casting the Republican nominee as an ideological shape-shifter. He claimed Thursday that the Romney who showed up to debate him is not the same Romney who's been showing up on the campaign trail.
Campaign adviser David Axelrod called Romney a "serial evader" and an "artful dodger" in a conference call Thursday.
"What we learned is that he'll say anything that makes him effective in the short term but vulnerable in the long term," Axelrod said.
However, Romney told Fox News in an interview Thursday that the president just "wasn't happy with the response to our debate."
He reiterated he wants to bring tax rates down while reducing deductions. "What the president's been saying and the reality are pretty far apart," Romney said.
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/10/05/fa...
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/10/05/fa...
#51570 Oct 5, 2012
What about this is hard to understand??????
Bush spent an average of $607 billion a year. Obama is spending $1.723 trillion a year. That will rise greatly once Obamacare takes full effect. Do you not see a difference?
#51571 Oct 5, 2012
It is absolutely amazing how someone can be so dilluted with democrap propaganda that when a truly honest person enters the scene they freak out. Wow, and I thought repubs were susposed to be sheep, WAAAAA, looks like democraps are psycho puppets. WAAAA, I mean BAAAAAA,
#51572 Oct 5, 2012
Statement in Support
We enthusiastically endorse Governor Mitt Romney’s economic plan to create jobs and restore economic growth while returning America to its tradition of economic freedom. The plan is based on proven principles: a more contained and less intrusive federal government, a greater reliance on the private sector, a broad expansion of opportunity without government favors for special interests, and respect for the rule of law including the decision-making authority of states and localities.
Applying these principles, Governor Romney would:
Signed (affiliations listed for identification purposes only)
Gary Becker, Nobel laureate
James Buchanan, Nobel laureate
Robert Lucas, Nobel laureate
Robert Mundell, Nobel laureate
Edward Prescott, Nobel laureate
Myron Scholes, Nobel laureate
Burton Abrams, University of Delaware
James D. Adams, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
Richard Adams, Oregon State University
Douglas Adie, Ohio University
Lee C. Adkins, Oklahoma State University
Richard Agnello, University of Delaware
James Ahiakpor, California State University, East Bay
Francis Ahking, University of Connecticut
William Albrecht, University of Iowa
Michael J. Alderson, Saint Louis University
John W. Allen, Texas A&M University
William Allen, University of California, Los Angeles
Fernando Alvarez, University of Chicago
Wayne Angell, Former Member, Federal Reserve Board
Joe Antos, American Enterprise Institute
J. J. Arias, Georgia College
Richard K. Armey, FreedomWorks
Nathan Ashby, University of Texas at El Paso
Christopher Azevedo, University of Central Missouri
Scott Baier, Clemson University
Charles Baird, California State University, East Bay
Eric Baklanoff, The University of Alabama
Spencer Banzhaf, Georgia State University
Robert J. Barro, Harvard University
William Beach, Alexandria, VA
Howard Beales, George Washington University
Stacie Beck, University of Delaware
Larry Belcher, Taylor University
Don Bellante, University of South Florida
Bruce Bender, University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
Lee Benham, Washington University in St. Louis
Michael Bennett, Curry College
Bill Beranek, University of Georgia
M. Douglas Berg, Sam Houston State University
Richard Bernstein, Temple University
and hundreds MORE......
#51573 Oct 5, 2012
Sorry, I don't mean to be mean but I just can't take dems and liberals serious. Liberalism is an STD - Socially Transmitted Disease!
#51574 Oct 5, 2012
"This country does not just succeed when just a few are doing well at the top," Obama said, according to a rush transcript of the remarks. "It succeeds when the middle class gets bigger. Our economy does not grow from the top-down, it grows from the middle-out.
>>--->>> We do not believe that anybody is entitled to success in this country. <<<---<<
But we do believe in opportunity.
Add your comments below
|ballpark||33 min||Schmedley T Troll||4|
|Who do you support for U.S. House in Kentucky (... (Oct '10)||3 hr||MAGA||1,035|
|jason byrn (Jan '13)||3 hr||RoamingInsomniac||26|
|Renee Vincent||3 hr||RoamingInsomniac||2|
|Tammy Stovall||6 hr||Not his friend||9|
|S'hmedley T Troll||Mon||Just sayin||241|
|Adam Hoffman||Mon||Schmedley T Troll||9|
Find what you want!
Search Scottsville Forum Now
Copyright © 2017 Topix LLC